In Hong Kong, a highly urbanized international metropolis, the issue of stray animals reflects profound contradictions between societal views on animal welfare and public management policies. For a long time, the government’s mainstream management policy for stray dogs has relied essentially on the “capture-euthanasia” method, which is considered outdated and cruel by international animal welfare organizations. This policy is not only ethically controversial but its long-term “effectiveness” in controlling population numbers is increasingly questioned by science. The Hong Kong Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals believes it is time to conduct a thorough scientific evaluation of the current policy and seriously explore the feasibility of a humane management alternative focused on “trap-neuter-return” (TNR). This would allow for the development of a more compassionate, scientific, and sustainable animal management strategy. The Ineffectiveness and Ethical Dilemma of the Current “Capture-Euthanasia” Policy The policy of humane destruction executed by the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department relies on removing individuals to directly reduce street populations. However, extensive international ecological research shows that this approach is often merely “a temporary fix.” When dogs and cats are removed from an area, the resulting vacuum of food and habitat resources quickly attracts animals from elsewhere, or perhaps surviving individuals increase their reproduction rates due to lower population density, leading to a rapid rebound in numbers. This creates a cruel and ineffective cycle: continuous capture and euthanasia without addressing the root of the problem. More fundamentally, this policy regards stray animals merely as “nuisances,” completely ignoring their feelings and welfare as living beings, which contradicts the growing societal awareness of animal protection. Each instance of capture and euthanasia not only ends a life but also leaves negative psychological impacts on community residents, particularly children, who witness these processes. “Trap-Neuter-Return” (TNR) as a Scientific and Humane Alternative In contrast, the TNR program represents a paradigm shift. The core steps of TNR involve: humanely trapping stray animals in a specific area, having veterinarians perform sterilization surgery, vaccinate, and apply simple markings (like clipping a corner of an ear), then returning them to their original habitat after recovery, where volunteers or the community can provide ongoing monitoring and care. This program is recognized by international authoritative bodies like the World Health Organization (WHO). The scientific principle behind TNR is that sterilization fundamentally halts reproduction, allowing the population to decline naturally and steadily over time. Sterilized animals exhibit diminished territorial behavior, reducing noise and injuries from mating fights, as well as aggression levels. Concurrently, vaccination improves the health of the animal population and lowers the risk of zoonotic diseases like rabies. Most importantly, TNR acknowledges the right of these animals to exist, allowing them to live out their lives in familiar environments, reflecting societal compassion. The Feasibility of TNR in Hong Kong: Legal Spaces and Practical Foundations It is important to emphasize that there are no insurmountable legal obstacles to implementing a TNR program in Hong Kong. According to current law, as long as the returned animals do not pose an evident and immediate danger and the local community does not strongly oppose it, there is operational leeway for such actions. In fact, various animal welfare groups and concerned citizens have conducted small-scale, spontaneous TNR practices in specific areas over the years, accumulating valuable local experience. These pioneering cases demonstrate that with the understanding and cooperation of local residents, along with support from veterinary teams, TNR can be practically implemented. However, these fragmented efforts lack policy recognition, systematic coordination, and resource investment at the government level, making it difficult to scale up and create a long-term mechanism. The key lies in whether the government can change its mindset from a “euthanasia-centric” approach to a “neuter-first” policy, officially recognizing TNR as one of the animal management options. Policy Optimization Recommendations: Moving Towards a Humane Management Model Based on Neutering To this end, the Research Department of the Hong Kong Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals proposes the following four specific recommendations to promote a scientific, humane, and sustainable stray animal management policy in Hong Kong: Conclusion: Choosing a More Compassionate and Wise Future The way we treat stray animals serves as a measure of a society’s level of civilization. Continuous reliance on euthanasia will only lead us deeper into a moral and practical deadlock. TNR is not neglecting animals; it is a scientific and humane solution that requires more efficient management, more detailed community collaboration, and long- term commitment. It calls for us to see animals as part of community issues rather than mere nuisances. Hong Kong fully has the conditions and capacity to draw on international successful experiences, combining them with local realities to create a model for humane management of stray animals in an Asian metropolis. We urge the SAR government to demonstrate political will, while the public provides understanding and support, to choose a better and more compassionate future for these voiceless lives and our shared community environment.

As a crossroads of Eastern and Western cultures, Hong Kong has deep-rooted traditional customs within its society. These customs, whether involving the use of wildlife products for medicinal purposes to pursue health or the practice of releasing animals to accumulate merit, carry specific cultural meanings and spiritual values. However, when these traditional practices intersect with modern wildlife conservation ideals and animal welfare science, profound tensions and contradictions often arise. Our organisation believes that a progressive society should be able to seek a wise balance between respecting cultural traditions and protecting ecological welfare. This paper aims to analyse the impact of relevant traditional practices on local and global wildlife conservation and propose policy optimisations that consider both cultural sensitivity and animal welfare. Wildlife Consumption Under Traditional Customs: Scale, Impact, and Regulatory Challenges The traditional use of wildlife in medicine is a significant factor affecting the survival of these animals. According to a 1996 survey, approximately 6.8% of Hong Kong’s adult population regularly use traditional Chinese medicine containing wildlife ingredients. Although the Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Hong Kong Ordinance No. 586) has generally fulfilled its obligations under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, regulating the international trade of endangered species, public awareness of the regulations is insufficient, law enforcement resources are limited, and market preference for “wild” sourced herbal medicines continues to create loopholes for illegal trade. This demand not only directly threatens the wild populations of endangered species such as pangolins, antelopes, and bears but is also accompanied by severe animal welfare issues related to the capture, transport, and farming processes involved (e.g., bear bile extraction). In addition, the technology for breeding some medicinal animals is still immature or prohibitively expensive, making it difficult to replace wild capture, complicating regulation further. Another widely practised custom is religious release. The original intention of release activities is to embody compassion and respect for life; however, without scientific planning and strict supervision, these activities often achieve the opposite. Improper releases can lead to several severe consequences: firstly, the animals released (be they invasive species or non-native indigenous species) may die in large numbers due to an inability to adapt to the wild environment, experiencing extreme suffering in the process, which fundamentally contradicts the intention of “compassionate care for life.” Secondly, these animals can cause invasive damage to local ecosystems, threatening the survival of native species. Moreover, large-scale commercial release practices have birthed a “capture—trade—release” industry chain, leading to further suffering for more animals during capture, transport, and temporary care, creating a vicious cycle driven by animal suffering. Finding Dialogue Space Between Cultural Heritage and Animal Welfare To address the challenges outlined above, we must transcend mere condemnation or prohibition, instead seeking constructive dialogue and innovative transformation. The core principle is to respect the cultural essence of customs while guiding their forms towards more scientifically informed, humane, and sustainable directions. Regarding the use of traditional medicine, emphasis should be placed on distinguishing between “efficacy” and “source,” promoting the use of sustainably farmed products, synthetic components, or plant substitutes to replace herbal medicines derived from endangered wildlife. This does not deny traditional wisdom; rather, it seeks to perpetuate its essence in innovative ways while addressing contemporary ecological ethical responsibilities. For release activities, the focus should return to the essence of “compassionate care for life,” shifting attention from merely the quantity of animals released to a genuine concern for the quality of animal life and the ecological consequences. Policy Optimisation Recommendations: Guiding Towards Sustainable and Humane Practices Based on the above analysis, the Research Department of the Hong Kong Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals proposes the following multi-layered policy recommendations aimed at guiding rather than opposing traditional customs’ transformation: Conclusion: Innovatively Transmitting Culture and Practicing Compassionate Care for Life Traditional customs are fluid; their forms evolve with contemporary knowledge and values. In the face of a global biodiversity crisis and a growing societal concern for animal welfare, reassessing and innovating our traditional practices related to wildlife is a responsibility that Hong Kong, as an international city, must undertake. This path of reform requires the collective effort of the government, industry, religious and cultural leaders, animal protection organisations, and every citizen. Let us be guided by wisdom and compassion, transforming the profound wisdom within traditional culture that advocates for the kind treatment of life into concrete actions that protect ecosystems and respect animal lives, building a harmonious society where cultural heritage and nature conservation coexist.

Hong Kong, as an international metropolis, consumes a significant amount of meat daily; however, society knows little about the suffering endured by the “economic animals” that provide us with meat during their final stages of life. The current Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance (Chapter 169) was not initially designed to protect farm animals, leading to severe legal gaps for pigs, cows, chickens, and other food animals during transportation, handling, holding, and slaughtering processes. Our research posits that a civilised society should not only focus on the welfare of companion animals but also ensure that those animals sacrificed for human existence are spared unnecessary suffering and torment at the end of their lives. This is a matter not only of animal welfare but also of food safety, public health, and societal moral standards. Legal Lag and Severe Disconnection from Reality The existing legal framework in Hong Kong offers minimal protection for economic animals. Although the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance prohibits “cruelty,” its provisions are vague and are rarely applied to animal production. On the other hand, the Public Health (Animals and Birds) Regulations and its subsidiary Animal Holding Facility Regulations do address animal transportation and slaughtering, but their legislative intent is to ensure meat hygiene and prevent disease transmission rather than to consider animal welfare. This misalignment in legislative spirit has resulted in regulation standards that are severely outdated, failing to reflect fundamental understandings of modern animal welfare science. For instance, the regulations lack specific technical standards that centre on animal welfare regarding vehicle design, loading density, travel time and rest periods, responses to extreme weather, and pre-slaughter handling methods. This legal vacuum effectively condones the suffering that is prevalent in the industry but remains unseen by the public. Welfare Deficiencies During Transport and Slaughter During transport, both local investigations and overseas studies indicate that animals often face immense stress and injury on their way to markets or slaughterhouses. Crowded loading spaces can lead to animals trampling each other, suffering from heat stress, dehydration, and injury. Improper vehicle designs, such as slippery floors, lack of proper barriers, or poor ventilation, can further exacerbate the animals’ fear and suffering. More worryingly, at that time, there were no laws in Hong Kong to limit the maximum duration of land transport, meaning animals could be confined in compartments for extended periods, enduring extreme physiological and psychological distress. The issues related to the slaughter process are even more critical. The core of humane slaughtering is to end an animal’s life in a state of complete unconsciousness and without pain. However, local investigations have found that, in some slaughterhouses, animals face extremely inhumane treatment before slaughter. This includes using inappropriate tools like electric prods for herding, causing severe distress in the animals; stunning equipment may not be properly maintained or operated, leading to inadequate stunning effectiveness. There is evidence indicating that the voltage settings for electric stunning used on pigs are sometimes below internationally accepted effective standards, meaning some animals may experience bleeding and dismemberment while still conscious. Such suffering is beyond imagination. Additionally, systemic issues such as excessively fast slaughter line speeds, insufficient employee training, and lack of welfare oversight substantially undermine the principle of “humane slaughter” at the execution level. Beyond Ethics: The Chain Reaction of Welfare Deficiencies Neglecting the welfare of economic animals results in consequences that extend beyond ethical concerns. Firstly, from an animal welfare perspective, severe and prolonged stress can significantly affect meat quality. When animals are in fear and pain, they secrete large amounts of stress hormones like adrenaline, leading to rapid depletion of muscle glycogen and resulting in dull, tough, and easily perishable meat known as “dark, firm, dry” (DFD) meat. This directly harms consumer interests and food safety. Secondly, inhumane operational environments can have negative impacts on the mental health of slaughterhouse workers and may increase the risk of workplace injuries. From a broader perspective, as global consumers become increasingly concerned about the ethical sourcing of food, Hong Kong’s lagging standards in this regard may also affect its international image. Policy Reform Recommendations: Establishing a Comprehensive Welfare System To address these issues, the Research Department of the Hong Kong Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals proposes the following specific policy recommendations aimed at systematically improving the welfare of food animals at the end of the supply chain: Conclusion: The Ethical Obligation of Attention Beyond Silence The suffering of food animals occurs outside of public view, but this does not mean we can remain silent about it. Incorporating animal welfare into the regulation of economic animal production is an inevitable trend in modern societal development. As a wealthy and developed society, Hong Kong has the resources and capability to make significant improvements in this area. We call upon the SAR government, Legislative Council members, industry representatives, and all citizens to address this long-neglected issue. Through legislative reform, stringent regulation, and public education, we can not only alleviate the suffering of countless animals but also measure and enhance the civility and compassion of our society as a whole. It is time to grant the final journey of these silent lives the respect and protection they deserve.

Hong Kong society prides itself on being a civilised city that cares for animals; however, in the dark corners of our city, an animal welfare crisis, tolerated by outdated laws, plays out daily. The core animal welfare legislation in Hong Kong—the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance (Chapter 169)—dates back to 1935. Nearly eighty years have passed, and this law appears ineffective in the face of today’s highly commercialised yet poorly regulated pet breeding and trade industry. A 2010 legal assessment report from the University of Hong Kong has clearly pointed out that current legislation can only respond to clearly “cruel” treatment of animals, failing to prevent the widespread neglect and systemic exploitation that exist. Shockingly, a survey conducted in 2006 revealed that there were only two licensed dog breeders in all of Hong Kong at that time. This figure absurdly contrasts with the vast supply of pets available in the market, exposing that the overwhelming majority of pet breeding activities are conducted in the grey areas of “unlicensed” or “amateur hobbyists.” These so-called “backyard breeders” are often profit-driven, placing animals in poor living conditions and disregarding their basic physiological and behavioural needs while massively breeding animals with hereditary diseases or behavioural issues. Existing laws are nearly powerless in addressing this. The entire process from the birth of a pet to its entry into a household suffers from a regulatory disconnect. Policy Optimisation Roadmap: Towards a Responsible Pet Supply Chain In response to the above gaps, the Research Department of the Hong Kong Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals proposes the following concrete and feasible policy recommendations aimed at establishing a regulatory system that safeguards animal welfare from the source: Conclusion: Upholding Civilised Values through Legislation Reforming pet breeding and trade is not about targeting legitimate businesses but rather about eliminating the breeding ground for the cruel exploitation of animals and establishing a fair, humane, and sustainable industry. As an international metropolis, Hong Kong’s animal welfare laws lag far behind those of countries like the UK and Taiwan. In 2006, the UK enacted the landmark Animal Welfare Act, explicitly introducing the concept of “animal welfare needs”; Taiwan’s Animal Protection Act has also undergone multiple revisions, imposing strict limitations on breeding and trading practices. Hong Kong must no longer delay. We call on the SAR government to address this urgent animal welfare and public issue by immediately initiating a comprehensive review and amendment of relevant legislation. We also urge all citizens to make ethical choices as consumers, supporting breeders and businesses that are transparent and prioritise animal welfare, and to consider adopting from animal rescue organisations. Only through forward-thinking legislation, strict law enforcement, and in-depth civic education can we end the silent suffering hidden behind iron cages and truly build a compassionate Hong Kong that treats all lives with kindness.